If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

IMO comments like this ruin a thread where people are presenting well thought out opinions & backing them up with solid reasoning. Whether you agree with them or not, if you can back up your logic with facts the way the OP has so done then it makes for a great thread. Minimizing everyone's opinions with snitty comments does nothing to add to the overall thread. & I don't say that to get on your case for the most part I think you're an awesome poster dude, but doesn't everyone deserve a chance to voice their opinions too as long as it's not done in such a way to incite childish negative commentary?

It was a joke man, lighten up. I didn't mean anything by it to the OP who has presented a well researched and valid arguement to some extent whether I agree or not.

Pretty much everyone on this forum, and NBA analysts in general, had expectations for our team, how players would do, and just how dangerous we could be this year.

Pretty much every single one of them has been met, or exceeded. Granted, maybe we really tank rest of season -- even with Melo -- and, or, get roasted in the playoffs. That will change things, but to date at least....

Actually, the biggest MDA skeptics, haters, whatever...had the lowest expectations as a whole, and have had them met the most.

They don't post as regularly anymore -- not slagging them for that, they just aren't as visible (abcd, eg).

MDA was supposed to NOT let this team be able to make the playoffs, have a quality record, develop *any* young talent. So those things then became the main metric for him to be judged.

Our win/loss, making making playoffs, and the general perception of "could they really }^*% those fools up?" type of ability to score an upset. Plus, just overall evaluations of players (including AR, which is a neg...but also, Fields/Chandler/Gallo/Douglas, and even STAT who quite a few didn't think would be able to put up *these* numbers)

edit -- perhaps there is a method to his madness, and not just a madness to his method.

I disagree. I hate this cat. After tonights abysmal showing now more than ever. That being said after signing STAT and acquiring the players that we did this offseason I felt the playoffs were a given.

I did expect to see:

Moz develop

AR develop

Not as many defensive lapses

Less of a reliance on the 3 pointer

MDA to matchup more often

Bigs being utilized more often. This one REALLY gets in my craw. I dont care if we would have won 10 games up to this point this year if he had tried to use some of his length I wouldnt have a problem with MDA. After seeing this cat exile every big he's touched since being with the Knicks I was ready to wipe the slate clean. But he blew it.

Small ball (especially if you arent using some high pressure defense) will not win in this league. Length ALWAYS wins out in the end. ALWAYS.

What I did see and continue to see:

Never makes an in game defensive personnel adjustment. When he does its too late. The exception to this is T D.

He never adjusts to whats beating us until, once again, its to late. What normally beats us is defense and rebounding.

Being that defense is an afterthought for MDA, shooting is the only viable way for us to get back into a game.

MDA's reluctance to use his personnel and his strict use of his offensive system will be his downfall with the Knicks. You cant keep giving away 20-21-22-23 year old prospects because they dont fit your system. Especially a system that hasnt won a chip...

Everything you wrote I agree with. Majorly agree with; and is actually the backbone for what I wrote. The one thing I disagree with, and what my post was about:

That Muskateer's research, legit? Most definitely. The facts? True and honest. The effort and presentation? Terrific and commendable.

Their conclusion -- that a good to very good defensive team is a likely requirement to have the best shot at winning chips? (obviously) True.

His conclusion -- that this reflects directly on D'anton in some major or obvious wayi; that it any way reflects that those coaches are superior to D'antoni (though most are); that the statistics have most to do coaching wizardy and defensive genius, and the ensuing tethering to a D'antoni Fatal Flaw,

bull****.

Stated facts, which are true, and have true causalities and conclusions tied to them (which you detailed in your post above), and that bear signficence to a discussion on the Knicks's winning a title and what the Knicks need,

instead warped, and desperately tethered to a separate speculation, and attempt to justify an arbitrary conclusion, creating a logical fallacy.

Another logical fallacy -- 1STAT's post, which I too agree with at the end of the day. But, mentioning that one team out of this all-powerful list won a chip, without "legendary players"....Totally true,

But doesn't disprove you "need "legendary players. First, I never said that, and if i messed up and said "you need legendary players" i was wrong, and didn't intend to state that as an absolute.

*But*, just like Muskateer is trying to say you generally need a good defensive team to win a title (true, of course), and that outliers; freakish occurrences; and that which is *unlikely* shouldn't be relied on to best win a championship. Ergo, MDA should go ASAP because the bottom-line is that he represents the course of most resistant, and *the least likely* way we can ever win a chip.

The Piston team you mentioned is just that -- an unlikely, rare occurrence. Based on the exceptionally rare depth/quantity of sick defensive players. Even here, we are talking about players -- and elite players. In this case, elite players regarding defense/team defense.

This still opposed to the most likely necessary, and important of things -- "legendary players". Which let's simplify to say Really Good Players.

And for the purpose of this discussion, that you need (good) players above all else. And the examples Muskateer provided, and detailed, show that it is the players -- above all else -- that dictate the championships,

Including dictating the defense a team needs to win them. Which, I'll give total credit, Muskateer perfectly and totally elucidated and described. And did so in really ****ing good presentation.

The buffer for all this, is that regardless of speculations (mine included) about MDA on defense...on offense...how his past can be interpret, how it can be used to forecast our future,

The most undeniable metrics for a team's success and the subsequent evaluation of it's coach....are undeniably in MDA's favor with the Knick's at this point.

When MDA actually begins to truly underwhelm (the playoffs, and at the latest early next season seems like it'd be a valid time to re-evaluate his job with our latest roster)....but when our team and our team's players....underperform to the expectations of Knick fans and analysts at large, the massive influx of anti-MDA threads and talk wouldn't just be expected...but for me, would be most appropriate.

Just like Doc Rivers was a donkey about to be fired who couldn't coach his way out of a paper bag. His team wins, and you forget about everything except the performance of players, their expectations, and if they are ultimately winning.

Really, it was the first sentence of your 1st post in the thread that threw me. I see where you were going now w it. No worries holmes..

I disagree. I hate this cat. After tonights abysmal showing now more than ever. That being said after signing STAT and acquiring the players that we did this offseason I felt the playoffs were a given.

I did expect to see:

Moz develop

AR develop

Not as many defensive lapses

Less of a reliance on the 3 pointer

MDA to matchup more often

Bigs being utilized more often. This one REALLY gets in my craw. I dont care if we would have won 10 games up to this point this year if he had tried to use some of his length I wouldnt have a problem with MDA. After seeing this cat exile every big he's touched since being with the Knicks I was ready to wipe the slate clean. But he blew it.

Small ball (especially if you arent using some high pressure defense) will not win in this league. Length ALWAYS wins out in the end. ALWAYS.

What I did see and continue to see:

Never makes an in game defensive personnel adjustment. When he does its too late. The exception to this is T D.

He never adjusts to whats beating us until, once again, its to late. What normally beats us is defense and rebounding.

Being that defense is an afterthought for MDA, shooting is the only viable way for us to get back into a game.

MDA's reluctance to use his personnel and his strict use of his offensive system will be his downfall with the Knicks. You cant keep giving away year old prospects because they dont fit your system. Especially a system that hasnt won a chip...

Fair enough. But when pre-season brawls were going on in KO, and people were giving their final judgements and season predictions and expectations....Including "analysts",

They were ones that MDA/Knicks have met or exceeded so far this season.

Can't hold this against *yours*.

But if you'd be ok if we win less games but put faith in size this year, you are going to rage against D'antoni until he wins a chip. His style and thinking will always piss you off first and foremost, and seem impossible to be truly legit. Barring the actual winning of a chip here.

Sorry guys. I was out all day. Thanks Rono, STAT1 and others for the compliments on the stats.

ISay has it right. I believe D'Antoni's past teams are an indicator of how his future teams will progress. Although iSay will call it speculation on my part, I will say that it is more of an educated inference. There are no reason to believe things are going to change with this Knicks team.

I think our main concern is the center position at this point. Will it help our defense? Absolutely. But you have to remember that we are bottom third. A defensive center is not going to make us a top 10 defensive team.

Defense, in basketball, is not something one player just does. It takes a team. It takes a committed team. Does that require player participation and willingness. Absolutely.

Our players have been preaching how they want to play D since the trade. Fair enough. They have their lapses, but I do believe they try. This game tonight was horrifying because I think they just gave up. They tried to blame one another instead up taking responsibility. That scares me.

However, I believe that it is a coaches job to make sure they are sticking to their assignments and making proper rotations. MDA has not shown to me this year (before or after the trade) that he is the coach to discipline the team.

Like on offense, playing defense together can make up for individual defects.

I think this team can be a top 10 defensive team. As was mentioned, we have role players who look like they want to step up. But, given that our two best players (our leaders) are purely offensive guys, I think it is going to take a special coach to get every single player on the same page. Given D'Antoni's past, he is not that guy. Can he become that guy??? Maybe? But, if he were to become that guy, don't you think he would have given us at least some sign by this point that he was.

We lost to the Pacers tonight. They scored 106 points. They shot... what... around 60% (haven't checked the stats).

It's unacceptable. The poorer teams in the league don't allow that kind of stat line. It was expected we'd make the playoffs this year. Sure. We will. But, right now, we have two superstars, and a great point guard in Billups. Expectations are rising for what this team should be able to do.

I don't think you can get rid of D'Antoni now. He still needs some time to put this team together. I'll give him the summer and next season. If he can't get our guys working together as a defensive unit by halfway through... Then I'd get rid of him.

With Bball you have a limited window to be great. If we give him another year and half or two years, fire him, hire a new coach, and then need to build more pieces into the team to suit that coach's style... who the hell knows where we'll be. Maybe Anthony has had enough and wants to go elsewhere at the end of his contract.

I think the writing is on the wall that MDA can't get it done. I think the that defensive numbers really show that he can't get it done. I don't want to hope we are an anomaly. I don't. I want to give us the greatest chance at winning... A top tier offensive team, but middle of the range in defense has shown over the past 15 years to be unacceptable at winning rings.

NY deserves a championship after all these years. We deserve a championship after all these years.

Edit
I do disagree with iSay on causality. You don't play defense, the other teams scores on almost every posession. They play defense, you don't score on every possession. They win the game. That is a direct cause.

But, hell, even assuming arguendo it was just correlative, I think that given the high percerntage, it is a correlation you want to have.

David Hume theorized that anything can change.... tomorrow gravity may not exist. The rotation of the Earth may not actually keep us planted to its surface. Perhaps it is actually another factor that keeps us held down that we don't know about it and that factor could just disappear. Maybe... But, given that the planet has been rotating and we are pressed to the ground, the correlation between the two is so strong that it is safe to theorize that one is related to the other.

When you see 11/15 teams with defense in the top 5, 14/15 in the top ten, the correlation holds that strong defensive teams win championships. Is that player related? Sure. Is it coach related? Sure.

MDA picks a team for an uptempo offense and will tend towards more offensive players than defensive. He, in fact, rarely gives a second look to defenders (with a few exceptions). So, whether it is players, coach, or both, D'Antoni's offense dictated certain players to be on this team. The resulting lack of defense is thusly directly related to MDA. My major point of this all is that if we are going to become a better defensive team, we need a coach that will accept defensive players AND give great defensive strategies...

To show you a coach has a direct causal effect on a player’s defense, please see below. You will note that all players under Tom -- even those not mentioned -- have a defensive rating increase. Notice Derrick Rose’s stats, in particular. His team was not that much different than the year before. Still had Luol Deng and Noah as defenders. His rating increased by 7 points…. This is when you introduce Boozer (known for poor defense) and Bogans to the starting lineup (who also increased his defensive rating under Tom: a career 107 points allow per hundred possessions went to 103).

Mind you that Rose’s stats increased by such a dramatic amount while having Noah injured for a few months…

Tom increased the team’s defensive rating a full 10 spots… He made them a number one team. Note this was expected because he was/is a great defensive coach…

Fair enough. But when pre-season brawls were going on in KO, and people were giving their final judgements and season predictions and expectations....Including "analysts",

They were ones that MDA/Knicks have met or exceeded so far this season.

Can't hold this against *yours*.

But if you'd be ok if we win less games but put faith in size this year, you are going to rage against D'antoni until he wins a chip. His style and thinking will always piss you off first and foremost, and seem impossible to be truly legit. Barring the actual winning of a chip here.

we will never win a chip with O'antoni unless he brings in a defensive coach to help him in areas he lack..

O'antoni had very good teams in PHX. mvp, etc... and couldnt do....so im not convinced.....a 60 win team should at least make it to the finals

I think some people on here think I and others are hating on D'Antoni because we just like to.

I am posting this thread not to debate about it more, but to show that our concerns on his defensive ratings and his lack of attention to it are almost certainly going to cost us a championship.

Please find below the offensive and defensive ratings for the championship teams for the past 15 years. You will find only one occasion where the defensive rating was outside the top ten during the regular seasons (That team's defensive rating (Lakers) was top ten during the playoffs).

Let us be clear about this.

Defensively:

Only 1 out of the last 15 teams who won a championship had a defensive rating outside the top 10 (6%)

14 out of the 15 teams were rated a top 10 defensive team (93%)

11 out of the 15 teams were top 5 in defensive ratings (73%)

13 out of the 15 teams were top 7 in defensive ratings (87%)

5 out of the 15 teams were number 1 in the league in defensive rating (33%)

Offensively:

Just 2 out of the 15 teams were best in the league offensively (13%)

3 out of 15 teams won a championship with offense ratings outside the top ten (20%). Meaning it is 3x's more likely you will win a ring with offense outside the top ten than defense outside the top ten. AKA, Defense is more important than offense.

9 out of the 15 teams were outside the top 5 offensively (60%)

Combined

11 out of the 15 teams were BOTH top ten in offense and defense.

3 of the 4 who were not top ten in both offense and defense, were a top ten defensive team.

Moral of the story is that only one team in the last 15 years was not in top 10 in defense. ONE. Of course that was the 2001 Lakers (never show up during the regular season). I checked their defensive ratings in the regular season compared to the playoffs. They raised their defensive rating to top of the league during the playoffs (only lost one game during the entire playoffs). So, even then, they were still one of the elite defensive teams in the playoffs. This makes EVERY team that won a championship for the past 15 years a top 10 defensive team.

In the end, you want a balanced offense and defense, but the stats below ultimately prove that defense is more important. If you have offense outside the top 10 in the regular season, you stand a 20% chance of winning a championship. Still really bad odds, but, much better when compared to teams who fell outside of the top 10 defensive teams in the regular season (6%).

You need a balance. You need offense and defense; but, if you are going to sacrifice one, you sacrifice offense and not defense. I'm not willing to put my odds at winning a championship at 6% (and that is provided MDA can make the Knicks a top defensive team during the playoffs).... Just not going to do it.

Hopefully these stats show that I and others are not hating on MDA for no reason. We see a pattern -- bad defense doesn't win championships. This is why we call for a new coach or a coach who will stress D.

Sure, we can be that 2001 Lakers anomaly with MDA as our coach (which really wasn't an anomaly when you see what the Lakers did defensively in the playoffs), but my questions are:

Wouldn't you rather be a part of the 93% group who won with defense? (100 percent when you look at the Lakers in the playoffs)

Doesn't that gives us a much better chance, no?

Ultimately everyone on this board wants what's best for the Knicks. These stats show that being a top 10 defensive team is what is best for the Knicks. Do you really want to take a chance on a coach that has NEVER had a top 10 defensive team?

To take it a step further, i would look at the Center position on those winning teams, and I would venture to say they are at least 6'11 serviceable players, and probably are accompanied by more depth. A supporter would argue we are void of this type of player- but in all fairness a consideration the MDA is partly responsible for that too is in order.

This study concludes defense not only is a major factor in winning, but infers MDA'S style, ability, and overall results lacked this important ingredient, and affected such directly and indirectly. Of course his supporters can find a silver lining in the fact that he can change his approach and the "two way" players needed to offset the negative unintended consequences of his system are a rare commodity, and given cap issues are next to impossible.

That said, really this information is for Donnie Walsh. He needs to decide which direction the franchise is headed; he decides which players (based on coaches input) and which coach is right. Like it or not, MDA has achieved putting the Knicks back on the map, of course with Donnie. Now the question is does Donnie feel he owes him?

In my opinion, the marriage between the Knicks and MDA was mutually beneficial. Going forward I think our goals are beyond what MDA is capable of without an adaptation. How long exactly it may take to prove this is the case I would speculate until the end of his contract, in all fairness.

I again never said a coach couldn't impact a team's D. We are talking about champions and more specifically, what can most profoundly....readily...and likely shape a team into the defensive stuff to be title-worthy.

This last post shows, again, in wonderful illustration something that is true....but doesn't have much to do with MDA or my prior post to your one before. It proves a point, and a good point, but doesn't prove the point (or at least the one that this thread was designed to prove).

It shows that a great defensive coach on a good team can make a big defensive impact on the team.

True.

Whenever Tibs is a coaching FA, or the equivalent to him is readily available, we can look into a replacement. But that reality doesn't exist right now.

Moreover, the biggest point made in this thread is about champions and championships and their defensive.

And your OP, which laid this bare, definitively proved that while coaching *can* make differences on a team's D (see your above, re: Tibs),

The actual champion list most clearly shows that players, NOT coach, who make the biggest difference, and most undeniable and likely difference.

In light of the fact that a defensive guru coach like Tibs isn't even readily available, it's even more appropriate to place an even greater burden on the players. Which already demonstrate that it is they who most *profoundly*...and *consistently* morph and impact a team's overall defensive ability *particularly* when you are concerned with building a *champion*,

per your initial OP which indeed showed the type of D necessary to most likely build a winner,

To take it a step further, i would look at the Center position on those winning teams, and I would venture to say they are at least 6'11 serviceable players, and probably are accompanied by more depth. A supporter would argue we are void of this type of player- but in all fairness a consideration the MDA is partly responsible for that too is in order.

This study concludes defense not only is a major factor in winning, but infers MDA'S style, ability, and overall results lacked this important ingredient, and affected such directly and indirectly. Of course his supporters can find a silver lining in the fact that he can change his approach and the "two way" players needed to offset the negative unintended consequences of his system are a rare commodity, and given cap issues are next to impossible.

That said, really this information is for Donnie Walsh. He needs to decide which direction the franchise is headed; he decides which players (based on coaches input) and which coach is right. Like it or not, MDA has achieved putting the Knicks back on the map, of course with Donnie. Now the question is does Donnie feel he owes him?

In my opinion, the marriage between the Knicks and MDA was mutually beneficial. Going forward I think our goals are beyond what MDA is capable of without an adaptation. How long exactly it may take to prove this is the case I would speculate until the end of his contract, in all fairness.

An excellent, maybe perfect post.

If Walsh "owes" MDA anything...perhaps he could get him but *one* undeniable,

This Man Is A Pretty Quality NBA Starting Center

A 1yr rental who was to date one of the biggest NBA busts of all time (Darko), and a (major) boom or bust mystery player in Randolph, who was trade bait himself, and who may well be more of an NBA sf/pf at this point than a 5....

Before concluding, and then canning MDA, on an (in)ability to shape a defense as is needed, when the most gaping hole on the team....is likely the worst in the entire NBA....and is arguably the most premium position in the game to have some known quality at, and further, is the most premium insofar as defining a team's D, and shaping it.